NOBTS Chapel and My Meeting with Dr. Kelley

Some time after Katrina (I’m not sure when. Months maybe. Those early years are a blur to me now) I arrived back to my house from a long day of helping visiting mission teams gut homes. My wife Michelle met me at the door with a big smile. It was hard to smile then and we were very busy. Well, I was very busy. Maybe too busy. But Michelle greeted me with a smile and said, “hurry in and look at what we received today.” There on the kitchen counter was probably the prettiest bouquet of flowers I’d ever seen and on the note was something like the following,

Dear Michelle and Jay, We know how busy you are during this difficult time and just wanted to let you know that we are praying for you both. Especially you, Michelle, for the sacrifice you are making while Jay is spending all this time serving with Disaster Relief. You are both appreciated.

Signed, Chuck and Rhonda Kelley

That note was then, and remains today, one of the most thoughtful things anyone ever did for us. I can’t tell you how much we needed that kind word at that time.

I have long appreciated Dr. Kelley for his encouragement to me and his heart for evangelism. I have loved him for his love for New Orleans and his service to our school. He has been gracious to my family, including to my mom and dad (Dad served for 10 years on the Board of Trustees at NOBTS). I publicly defended him from the floor of the Convention way back during the “Sole Membership” issue. Prayed for him in the aftermath of Katrina. Disagreed with him on some administrative issues at NOBTS and then this past Tuesday was disappointed and deeply frustrated with his chapel message that opened the Fall semester at NOBTS. You can find the link to that video HERE.

In the 16 years I have known Dr. Kelley I had never seen him stick out his neck like he did this past Tuesday. He rarely engages in polarizing topics. He appears never to be rattled by the goings on around the convention. He, to my knowledge, has never publicly waded into the trite debates of social media. But there was something markedly different on Tuesday.

Admittedly, he did something he had never done before and that was to publicly offer his own personal thoughts, from his private journal, during a chapel message about the state of the Southern Baptist Convention. While many of us in the blogosphere regularly comment on SBC issues without giving it a second thought, for him, it is unusual. And it was disconcerting and uncomfortable for me to see it happen the way it did.

Most everything he said during the first half of the message (much of the second half was agreeable to me) felt to me, not angry or malicious, but rather like I was watching a deeply hurt man react to frustration and pain that has been building for some time.

I basically disagreed with almost everything he said. He spoke of communicating with people who expressed great disappointment in the meeting in Dallas and on the direction of the future of the convention. I, on the other hand, have never been more encouraged and excited about the SBC and its future. He spoke of concerns for entities and decision makers that came across as frustrating and perplexing for him, and although I have had concerns about our entities from time to time I have not once been as moved to the level of disappointment that he is experiencing.

After his message Tuesday afternoon I though about contacting him, but then I thought (or hoped) maybe folks didn’t interpret the message the way I was afraid it was going to be interpreted. So I waited, but I didn’t have to wait for long. Social media lit up and it was clear that for some, his message came across even worse than I assumed it had. So, Friday afternoon I contacted his office for a meeting and he graciously received me. What follows is not a verbatim account of our two hours but is a survey of our interaction and my thoughts. It was a private conversation with privileged information which I will not divulge, but he is aware that I was going to write about our meeting and spoke openly to me.

After a kind welcome, he asked about my dad’s health. We chatted for a moment and I began my remarks by expressing my appreciation for him, retelling him of the story of those flowers after Katrina and how important I believe, just as he does, it is for brothers to speak with one another when we have differences. I expressed my concern over his comments, how I believe they have been taken in a very negative light by a great many Southern Baptists. I expressed my concern for him and for how his remarks reflected on our school as well. I told him that it was clear to me, although others may not have seen it, that I was watching a man that was hurt and that I was surprised by his message because it was not what I was used to seeing from him. I went on to state my concern for how his words could be damaging to recruiting efforts for new students and frustrating for current seminary students who might feel as if their thoughts/opinions and their hopes for the future of the SBC have been dismissed as being off course. I spoke for quite some time on a number of concerns and he listened actively and with interest. Then it was his turn to share his thoughts.

If Dr. Kelley is anything, he is a walking encyclopedia of Southern Baptist life and history. He recounted some aspects of the history of the SBC of which I was unaware. He spoke of the histories of entities, of stories of convention work and cooperation through the years and his deeply held conviction about what is happening in the SBC.

Although he did not “double down” on his remarks from Tuesday, his conviction regarding his concerns remain steadfast. He did not say this to me but I honestly do not think he expected the kind of response his message engendered. It is clear to me he feels strongly that he is expressing the sentiments of a significant portion of people in the SBC and as evidenced by the number of people that have corresponded with him before and after his message, he appears to feel validated in most, if not all of the concerns which he shared on Tuesday.

I believe he painted an unfortunate, dark and foreboding picture of the SBC on Tuesday and I could not disagree with him more. I see great hope in the future of our convention. I am very happy about the election of our new president (of whom, by the way, Dr. Kelley spoke very highly and shared his confidence in Dr. Greear’s work in evangelism and passion for the gospel). I am encouraged by the overall direction of the entities (but will continue to offer critique when I feel it is appropriate) and I am down-right excited with this current generation of pastors and young people who have a great passion for the lost and a heart for discipleship. I have argued in the past that convention entity heads ought to be allowed to speak their mind about issues in SBC life, just like the rest of us (albeit not in the area of entity servers being used for electioneering 🙂 ) … and, well… he did just that. He shared his concerns. I just wish he hadn’t done it in chapel.

It is most evident to me that his greatest concern is with the change in dialogue we have witnessed which favors spending time on secondary and tertiary issues in place of focusing on the “heart matter” of evangelism. To me, it appears that his particular critiques weren’t as much about the specific concerns he shared as it is that those things, in his mind, are the evidences that our focus is not where it should be. He offered me a helpful analogy in the form of “conversations at a party.” He noted that the tone and tenor of a party is often loud with many different conversations going on at the same time. He suggested that the reason for or theme of our party (the SBC) is for the work of evangelism. However, he notes, when the purpose of the party has been lost, people begin to hear and pay more attention to the private side conversations taking place at the party and we become distracted by the peripheral dialogues. He believes the reason for the problems, which he has pointed out, is due to our lack of focus on evangelism. I heard him loud and clear on that. In fact, I’m now rehashing his sermon through that lens. All in all, it is even more clear for me that a sort of perfect storm happened for Dr. Kelley on Tuesday with (1) his personal convictions, (2) validation from an agreeing segment of Southern Baptists, and (3) his own hurts and concerns culminated in privately-journaled thoughts that were (unfortunately, in my opinion) unveiled in a chapel message.

Dr. Kelley does not need me to defend him, nor would he want me to, and certainly, in this case, I would not do so. We not only have disagreements about the content of his message but also about some of the mode and tone of the message. However, what we ALL need is to realize that each of us are more often misunderstood than completely understood by others. I know I have been. I believe Dr. Kelley to be wrong about most of his concerns, although I now understand his concerns better than I did. I believe him to be wrong about the state of the SBC, but I now understand what he is seeing that moves him in that way, even if I disagree with his interpretation. What is NOT wrong is his heart for the lost, his love for the SBC and his willingness to stand up and say what he feels is right even if he is in the minority. I think the most important thing I took from our meeting is that we would all do well to remember in these days, however you feel about the state of the SBC, there are considerable numbers of Southern Baptists who feel differently about the health of the SBC.

On a side note, I was reminded today why it is so important to interact with those with whom we disagree. Sitting down with one another does not mean, nor should it mean, that we rise in unanimous agreement. But it does mean that we are giving ourselves and the other an opportunity to listen and to be heard. I have been reminded anew that to sit on the other side of a computer screen and lob ad hominems to and fro is sinful action. It is unchristlike. I needed to remember that. We need to be better at communicating. We need to engage one another. We need to be people who will “talk with” one another rather than just “talk about” one another.

Also, let me reiterate something for current and any possible future students of NOBTS. I am very proud of our seminary on a couple of fronts. As Dr. Kelley mentioned in the later part of his message, NOBTS has always been a balanced school. In my words, we have had both 5 point reformed profs and 4 point remonstrant profs. 😉 Speaking as a Pastor who holds to a reformed soteriological position, I can say that I have only and ever been appreciative of the good balance of professors at NOBTS. We are not a “Reformed” seminary and we are not an “anti-Reformed” seminary. We are a Baptist Seminary holding to the tradition of “both rails” and I want to assure anyone who might view Dr. Kelly’s chapel message in contrary terms to rest assured, that will not change. His hiring philosophy has kept our school balanced and for that I am very thankful.

We left one another still in disagreement about the particulars but I hope we left with a little more respect and appreciation for one another having sat down to talk as brothers should. This is how Jesus taught us it ought to be. For the sake of our school I believe we can move past this issue and on to a mutually shared excitement for the future of the cooperative work of the SBC.

P.S. I have asked Dr. Kelley if he would be willing to consider writing something for us here at Voices that might offer more insight or help to clarify his position and he received that offer with a smile and suggested he would consider that opportunity. I hope he does.

Share this:

Like this:

LikeLoading...

Related

About Jay Adkins

Jay Adkins has been the Pastor of FBC Westwego (metro New Orleans) since 2002. He has an M.Div. & Th.M. (both from NOBTS) and is currently working on his Ph.D. Jay is a jazz drummer, drives a Jeep Wrangler, loves to boil and eat crawfish and loves New Orleans culture and history. He’s been married to Michelle since 1996 and is the proud dad of Quint and Canon, two award-winning NOLA musicians. WebsiteTwitter

Notify of

John R.

Unity in a biblical sense does not arise from agreement per se but from common purpose. Common purpose allows many differences in personality, approach, history and even doctrine to fade in the face of a greater calling that unites. Trying to gain unity by resolving or eliminating differences has always been a tenuous road. Common purpose provides the motive power that allows us to lay aside what divides in pursuit of something greater.

-Withdrawal of IMB missionaries then resignation of its President to pastor a local, barely-SBC church
-Resignation of executive committee president for moral failure
-Resignation of 3 seminary professors this summer for moral failures (different schools, different situations)
-SBC statesman/seminary president put out of office via wrong procedures because of outside cultural pressure
-Convention presidency vote that was viewed by many as a referendum on younger, Reformed versus older, non-Reformed crowd
-SBC has always been comprised of Reformed and non-Reformed, but we’ve never before fought about it
-Almost 20 years of declining baptisms in churches with little effort to address the matter
-Decade of church planting emphasis which has resulted in net gain of 99 churches per year in SBC
-Let’s unite for the sake of sharing the gospel with the lost

There was nothing “wrong” with the procedure used to remove Patterson who gave just cause for the action. Saying that the trustees did wrong is inaccurate and untrue.

JD Greear made it clear to anyone who would listen to facts that he hardly falls into the Reformed camp. Many lies were told as scare tactics- about JD, but repeating them here us unworthy.

Most of us don’t want to fight about Calvinism. But

the shady campaign against Greear was led by fear-mongering and outright lies.

The convention rejected that by overwhelming majorities at every turn.

I know that Dr. Kelley is hurting as a result of his brother-in-law’s ouster, but this was the wrong way to work out his frustrations.

I want to say that I have very positive experiences with NOBTS. The admin and staff were extraordinarily supportive of us in 2017. and I have some good friends there. This is a disagreement about A SERMON not a repudiation of the seminary or some kind of blanket condemnation of Dr. Kelley.

I do think his statement that the #metoo movement was nothing more than a mess stirred up by a couple of gay activists could cause him a lot of regret. Statements like that have not been well received and have gotten others in a LOT of trouble. Most of the other statements in the sermon were points of disagreement. That one was one that could get him into a world of hurt. He should probably repudiate it, apologize for it, and attempt to move on.

Dr. Harwood,
Thank you for your response. Actually, I had hoped not to list specific concerns and I have deliberately tried not to be argumentative. But, you asked what I found objectionable so I will carefully answer and try to be as brief as I can.

IMB and Dr. Platt – First, some see as a terrible tragedy that we had to draw down our IMB mission force. I see the real tragedy being the IMB’s deplorable financial situation which necessitated the difficult decisions from Dr. Platt in order to function with fiscal responsibility and integrity of Stewardship. I announced to Twitter on September 16th 2009 (the day of Dr. Rankin announced his retirement) that David Platt should become the new President of the IMB because he was, and remains, the most evangelistic person I’ve ever known. However, as a pastor, I completely understand why he’d want to move back into the pastorate. I never want to leave the pastorate. Do I wish his church was a 100 year old SBC church that gave a lot to the CP? Yes. But the fact is, it was a church that one time gave nothing to convention causes, that now is a cooperating church. Ultimately, that’s a good thing not a bad thing. Second, I believe it is unseemly for an entity head to publicly cast dispersions on another entity head. However, I recognize that Dr. Kelley could not have expressed these concerns without everyone knowing of whom he is speaking. So I get it. However, he made reference to a number of other individuals but found a way to do that without using their names. I found that “call out” unfortunate. Further, I read frustration behind his words that hearkens back to a few lesser-publicly-known past interactions that I will leave unwritten here. That hurt was clear to me and likely to anyone who knows about those circumstances.

Resignations due to moral failures – I grieve with Dr. Kelley regarding the resignations of Dr. Page and three other professors due to moral failures but I’m not sure how that plays into “SBC correction anxiety” in any other way than an appropriate, deep and abiding grief over sin, which I did not hear him expand on in those terms. NOBTS has had similar resignations and even a heartbreaking suicide due to such sin. Indeed, I believe him to be correct about the unprecedented nature of the resignation of an entity head due to this but to infer that it was a “convention direction” problem was again, unfortunate.

Dr. Patterson and SWBTS – I’d rather stay away from this one. Suffice it to say by convention vote, it appeared that the action of the Executive Board of the SWBTS Trustees was upheld, at least… or ratified, at best. You and I will disagree on what you call his dismissal due to “outside cultural pressure.” I firmly do not believe that to be the case. Apparently, and I have no personal knowledge of this, there were more reasons for his termination than what was first publicly reported. What was most unfortunate was his choice of language and his statement regarding “the biggest mess the SBC has seen in a very long time” being attributed to the #METOO movement and “the efforts of two gay activist with Southern Baptist roots.” His words here were insensitive and unhelpful. And it is best if that is all I say about that.

Convention Election – Let me be clear here. This election and its unprecedented (in recent years) landslide was not about a younger/reformed verses older/non-reformed battle royal. Rather, it was about (1) Dr. Greear’s gracious action at the meeting in St. Louis, (2) a desire to breath fresh life into our convention and (3) the LBC’s interference in the weeks leading up to the Dallas meeting. In being the one to expose the action of the LBC, I received innumerable correspondence from around the country regarding frustration and concern over those who were attempting to make this election about what you call the younger/reformed verses older/non-reformed referendum. It was not. Not quite a year before Dallas I mentioned to numerous people that I was expecting a 60/40 split in favor of Dr. Greear. Due to the correspondence I was getting I was telling people it was going to be a 70/30 split about a month out because of the actions of my state convention and their desire to paint this as a Reformed v. Anti-Reformed election. That whole thing was a sad and badly calculated action.

Reformed / Anti-Reformed Fight – It is true that there have always been the “two rails” of Reformed and non-reformed soteriology present in the SBC. I articulated as much in my article. Dr. Kelley was also correct in stating that until recently we’d not seen such a fight. However, I argue that this fight has not come from the reformed side. Now, don’t hear me wrongly, clearly, I see that there are plenty of young reformed guys who are antagonistic, immature and wrongfully argumentative… but those conversations are generally on-line, in the campus coffee shop and in some Sunday school classes. As a member of the reformed class I was completely satisfied with being in the minority. I had no problem with that. What I haven’t appreciated is the marginalization of men and women who think like me, a marginalization which I have only witnessed over the last 10 – 15 years. And boy have I witnessed it! (1) The removal of faculty members for their views which came about as an offering of protection for those who are most angry about those “particular” views, (2) A false narrative of a “Calvinist conspiracy” charged against Trustee board members when only 2 of us of the 33 board members even leaned reformed and (3) the creation of a network that was organized for the sole purpose of coming against Calvinism (which thankfully, has seen its demise due to the actions of a member exposing the very nature of mean-spiritedness of which I am speaking). There is not a “reformed” group I know about that was organized to come against the “Traditionalist” soteriological perspective. This sort of antagonism has only, in my experience and research, happened from the anti-reformed side. I challenge anyone to show me where the reformed view has been the antagonizer over the last 10 -20 years in the greater SBC life as a whole.

Declining Baptisms – Clearly there have been declines in baptism numbers. Although that is concerning to me, I’d argue there could be other determining factors as to why that is rather than simply blaming Calvinism (not that Dr. Kelley explicitly said that) or a wholesale neglect of evangelism. Any pastor who has examined his church membership list can attest to the idea that early baptism numbers might not be as accurate as we want to hold them up to be. The lack of attendance of over 50% of baptized “Southern Baptist: members on any given Sunday might be more of a testimony to the non-regenerate state of those members than it is to an indicator of past salvation stats. Further, could it be that a post-Christian, post modern world lends itself to more skepticism than the world of the American South many of us grew up in? Surely there is no argument that we live in a far more “hostile-to-the-gospel” culture than we once did. Yes. We all need to focus on evangelism and I hope that yesterday’s announcement by NAMB might be able to help us move the needle on that. We will see.

NAMB and Church Planting – Speaking of NAMB. I was concerned early on by the shift from a more broad approach to missions to that of a central focus on Church Planting. However, I am seeing some shift back to a wider vision there and that excites me. But in the chapel message, NAMB’s church planting focus was maligned by suggesting that for the “massive effort” and “our all out emphasis on church planting” we’ve only seen a net change of 99 churches. Again, I suppose that is one way of looking at it. However, with the close of an average of 772 churches a year, what would our convention look like were it not for the church planting emphasis? 772 dead and gone churches! We’d be hundreds of churches less every year. Thousands of churches less over the last 10 years. NAMB’s work in Church Planting is something to celebrate not malign.

Uniting for the Sake of the Gospel – Again, I was very much in agreement with the last half of Dr. Kelley’s sermon. Absolutely we need to unite for the sake of sharing the gospel with the lost. However, I can personally tell you that it is hard to unite with those who want to see you put out of the convention. Not because I don’t want to unite, but because others don’t seem to want to unite with me (us). I had a very influential Southern Baptist leader once tell me (not Dr. Kelley) that the Baptist Faith and Message should be changed to exclude anyone “who even leans reformed.” That is not only unfortunate but also un-Christlike.

As far as having “The Baptist Blues” I would argue, due to the overwhelming vote totals at the Dallas meeting and because of the conversations I myself have had with many Southern Baptists, that there is a great excitement for our future. Many of us are very happy coming out of Dallas but I am also very aware that there are those who are not.

Let me just reiterate this point, I was reminded by our 2 hour dialogue that in many ways this is an issue of interpretation. He (and I suppose, you) see the circumstances in one light and clearly I see them in another. This is why I wrote the article the way I did. We have disagreements and our perspectives and subsequent interpretations are not the same. My interpretation is that the best times are ahead of us and I am loving (most-all of) what I am seeing. Soli Deo Gloria!

Jay,
Thanks for your thoughtful and peaceable reply. I was not attempting to weigh in on the matters that Dr. Kelley mentioned in his message, but only to summarize the issues I heard him address. Your restatement of what you heard and your commentary on why you did not appreciate his remarks help me understand your perspective. Thanks again, friend.
Blessings,
Adam

“I can say that I have only and ever been appreciative of the good balance of professors at NOBTS. We are not a “reformed” seminary and we are not an “anti-Reformed” seminary. We are a Baptist Seminary holding to the tradition of “both rails” and I want to assure anyone who might view Dr. Kelly’s chapel message in contrary terms to rest assured, that will not change. His hiring philosophy has kept our school balanced and for that I am very thankful.”

As a former Trustee at NOBTS and one time chairman of the Instruction Committee, I can attest to his thoughtful and broad parameters of hiring practices. I witnessed Dr. Kelley and Dr. Lemke (neither of whom could ever be considered Calvinists) go to the mat for the hiring of several reformed professors. Yet they sought to balance the Philosophy and Theology division with world class theologians from one end of the spectrum to the other. I have always admired their desire to present a balanced presentation of ideas to the students, and I was also impressed with the professional, collegiality practiced by those very diverse faculty members.
Some of the statements in the Chapel address were personally disappointing. Many of us have disagreed with Dr. Kelley from time to time on one issue or another, but there are a few facts cannot be denied – Chuck Kelley is a man who deeply loves Jesus, the SBC and New Orleans Baptist Theological Seminary. He loves telling the Gospel message to any who will hear it. In private moments I have seen him exhibit God’s Grace in the face of opposition. As he nears the end of his tenure as the SBC Seminary President best known for his evangelistic fervor, I pray that this message will not overcome his positive legacy.

August 25, 2018 9:58 pm

Debbie Kaufman

“This summer) the #MeToo movement’s focus on sexual abuse became a dominant national conversation. Driven by efforts of two gay activists with Southern Baptist roots it became a dominant conversation in the SBC as well, leading to the biggest mess the SBC has seen in a very long time, the internal controversy at Southwestern Seminary.”

Thus speech is more than a disagreement Jay, especially in light of the above comment take it directly from the speech. I hope that you mentioned this to him and I hope that it was more than just a disagreement as this is an out-and-out falsehood meant to discredit all involved.

Jay, I greatly appreciate this post and your graciousness here. As the Convention moves forward, Dr. Kelley represents a significant number of people who share similar convictions and hurt. Even though, like you, I am among those who are encouraged and excited about the direction of the Convention, I want to be sensitive to those who see things differently and are struggling with all that is going on. They way that you have responded to Dr. Kelley is a model of how we should be responding to all of our brothers who share similar concerns. My desire has always been unity, and this is a helpful step in that direction. Thank you.

August 26, 2018 7:12 am

Glenn

For the record, serious financial failures are the reasons I think PP should have been removed fromSWBTS

TO the tune of over $20M

August 26, 2018 9:42 am

Brett G.

I don’t understand his criticism against the “younger reformed” Greear and why his election would “add to the concern of many” on the “traditional” emphasis of evangelism and missions. Who are the “many?” Why are they fearful? Why didn’t he correct them if Dr. Kelley, as you said, “spoke very highly and shared his confidence in Dr. Greear’s work in evangelism and passion for the gospel?” What’s the deal with using the word “traditional?” Is there something “non-traditional” that more reformed people do when sharing the gospel? Can the “many” not see that decline has happened under non-younger, non-reformed presidents? What’s going to happen now? Not just decline, but decline-decline?

“Unfortunate, dark, and foreboding” was his take on the SBC indeed.

August 26, 2018 4:24 pm

Greg

The election of a SBC president who says muslims and Christians worship the same God is the most concerning to me.

I’m gonna have to affirm that Greear did, indeed, come across in his book “Breaking the Islam Code” as affirming that Muslims and Christians both attempt to worship the God of Abraham. The following is a quote (with a tangential section eliminated).

“Muslims claim to worship the God of Adam, Abraham, and Moses. Most missionaries find it therefore helpful to use the Arabic term for God, “Allah” (meaning literally, “the Deity”), to refer to God, and to explain that the God Muslims believe in, the God of the Prophets, was the God also present in bodily form in Jesus Christ and the One worshipped by Christians for the past two millennia.

“You might ask, ‘But isn’t the Islamic God so different from the Christian God that they cannot properly be called by the same name? Aren’t we worshipping two different gods?’ Believing wrong things about God and worshipping him incorrectly doesn’t mean one is worshipping a different God. Many first-century Jewish people rejected the Trinitarian nature of God and that Christ was a messenger of God. Yet the apostles did not say that those Jews were worshipping a different God, just that they were worshipping the one true God incorrectly…..

[skipping down the page]

“Muhammad preached many incorrect things about the one true God, but he made clear that he was referring to the God of the Old Testament, the God first revealed to Adam and Abraham. Thus, it is my opinion that it will be most helpful to start with the one, true revealed God of Abraham as the common ground to begin discussing the gospel with a Muslim.

This section rests within a larger passage on connecting with Muslims and overcoming our own misunderstandings. Greer goes on to affirm that Muslims must have a fuller understanding of the God of Abraham if they are to experience Him fully and receive the salvation they so desperately need. Indeed, the entire book is about understanding the Muslim worldview and how to work through it to bring them to a place of more fully grasping the entirety of God, including those aspects that Muslim thinking rejects as well as eliminating their own misconceptions about God.

Part of the PP supporter response was to go after the female victim. I asked you twice if this was in any way troubling to you and you never bothered to answer. You are one of the stand ups solid guys around here. Would you answer that question? Thanks.

William Thornton,
First, you have previously asked in ambiguous ways. At least you are starting to get a little closer to what you want. Before you were just asking if I had a problem with a report.
Second, I already answered your question at SBC Today.

As far as you asking now about going after a female victim.

1. Both sides of an issue should always be heard, regardless of whether they are male or female.

The first one to plead his cause seems right, until his neighbor comes and examines him. -Proverbs 18:17

2. There have been numerous cases where an allegation of rape proved to be a false charge. Go to court and let both sides present their evidence. Some people’s lives have been ruined by a false accusation.
William, if a woman falsely accuses rape, do you think she should be punished?

3. Sadly, there are cases that can never be resolved in court because of a “he said, she said” situation. Sometimes they were both drunk, so how does a court sort it out?

4. Just because an accuser is a female, does not mean we should immediately accept her version. The entire situation should be investigated. This does not necessarily mean you are “going after a female victim.” By the way, is that different than “going after a male victim?”

5. If a couple had an illicit affair, then there is an accusation of rape; the affair should probably be considered in evidence.

6. If someone accuses rape, but does not want to press charges, that is a significant issue.
But if rape is clearly proven, I would not be opposed to the death penalty.

I repeat, it is incredibly sad that an SBC statesman/seminary president was put out of office via wrong procedures because of outside cultural pressure.
And, when Paige Patterson found out a student alleged rape, he immediately informed the police. Just as he was supposed to do.

Not interested in discussing the process. The convention spoke loudly on the matter.

My question was if you were in any way troubled by pp supporters going after the alleged rape victim at SWBTS. You didn’t answer and didn’t even approach the question. You presume a false accusation and then press that as the salient point. The accuser had a third party distribute information, allegedy, about her sex life. This is unproven, certainly to you, me, and the thousands who followed the matter and the tactic is common in the courtroom when an accuser’s sexual history is used to nullify a claim of rape.

I merely asked if this tactic made you in any way uncomfortable or is this the kind of hardball that is easily accepted when defending your heroes?

You asked if I think false accusations should be punished. Sure. There are civil remedies and maybe criminal also. That should cover 2-4% of the cases.

Now. How about an answer. A single syllable would be sufficient. It had to do with the donor letter.

Our blind support of heroes sometimes puts us where we ought not to be.

August 27, 2018 2:18 pm

Tarheel_Dave

David B. Your not answering…leaves us to infer an answer is actually being given – that you, in fact, have no issue or reservation with a Patterson’s defenders intentionally and actively seeking to discredit and besmirch an already victimized young lady.

Would that be a correct inference for us to make?

August 27, 2018 3:23 pm

Jeff Straub

I am not sure why my original comment wasn’t posted. So I’ll try again. I have a PhD from Southern (2004). I was baptized and married in a SBC church. I follow the SBC closely.

I have watched the SBC world carefully as a Baptist historian. I read this blog regularly. I listened carefully to what Chuck said this week. And I read Jay’s post. While Chuck was pretty pessimistic, what I heard was an old soldier (no disparagement here) exhort the recruits to do better. What was there to object to really. Granted others may be more optimistic, but isn’t he entitled to his view and hasn’t he earned the right to be heard? Just asking.

FWIW I left the SBC world in the 70s before the Conservative Resurgence. Things are different today and I have great appreciation for the changes in the last 25 yrs. But this does not negate concerns of recent events, some of which Chuck articulated.

Jeff

August 26, 2018 7:03 pm

Tarheel_Dave

Wow Jay. This is an excellent piece!

Thank you.

I agree with you that much of what he said cane from a deep place of institutional and personal hurt. I do think though that his comments, while I do disagree with many of his sentiments and thought some of his phrasing and illustrations went a little far, are important and meangful and we would do well to listen and hear his heart.

He didn’t come across to me as a hater (I’ve never viewed him that way), his message wasn’t a screed. He wasn’t, to me, seeking to impugn others or marginalize those with whom he obviously disagrees. In fact he, several times, made effort to demonstrate that was NOT what he was doing.

He was/is hurting and he let it show. I applaud him for his transparency and the, what I saw and heard as, charity with which he shared his heart.

He came accross, to me anyway, as one who is fledging to find his place as part of, for good or for ill, a generation whose religious traditions and practices and preferences are being reimagined by an upcoming generation. That is painful. We see this same phenomenon all the time in our churches and deal with the outflow of that pain as we lead “change”. I think, actually, he handled it well. I’ve certainly seen it handled worse.

He and others should take courage though that the gospel proclamation of the upcoming generation is, like his, anchored to the biblical gospel, that evangelism and discipleship are, like in his generation, the focus of our cooperative partnership as Baptists and that our theological differences on secondary mattters, while real and substantive, has never and will not now stop our cooperative partnership.

Whether he should or shouldn’t have done this in chapel I will leave to students, alumnus, and the ultimately the trustees of the NO Baptist Theological seminary to opine on that.

However, what we ALL need is to realize that each of us are more often misunderstood than completely understood by others.

And that we are often on the other side of that – that is, that we often misunderstand others. The first step to becoming a good listener is one of humility- acknowledging that we often misunderstand others. The person who blithely thinks he/she is a good listener is unlikely to actually be one.

Later today, I’ll make time to listen to Dr. Kelley’s message and see how it hits my own ears.

But I’ll say this: thank you to Dr. Kelley and to Jay for the fact that Jay had concerns about what was said, and Dr. Kelley took time to listen and respond. And being occasionally behind the scenes around here, I know that Jay knew that when it was possible, Dr. Kelley would take that time.

Even given that both of them knew there was disagreement. There’s a value in an institutional leader being willing to make time in his schedule to deal with those who have disagreements. There are some who would suggest Dr. Kelley should have scheduled meeting with Jay on September 31st, and hope there would be no blogging until then.

Instead, he made time. That’s a good thing, an honorable thing.

And I, too, look forward to seeing some amplification/clarification of some the points, whether you take them from Jay’s summary or Dr. Harwood’s. I’d like to see how we’re defining “little effort” to address declining baptisms–we’ve heard decades of laments and seen a good number of evangelism pushes from NAMB, Lifeway, state conventions, stresses on evangelism training in seminary, all in the last couple of decades. There’s also an interesting correlation between the “end” of the CR and the beginning of that decline. So there’s some questions there that I would love to see some of our elder statesmen, like Dr. Kelley, help us wrestle with: why is that we “won” the Battle for the Bible and ended up in this mess?

We all agree, I think, that the SBC is in a mess. Let’s try to figure out how we got there, looking not only at “who’s wrong now?” but at what have we collectively done wrong across the last 2 decades?

August 27, 2018 10:06 am

Shelvin Lamb

I 100% agree with what I heard a trusted friend, pastor, and well respected sbc leader say to me over a decade ago: “I trust Chuck Kelley with my life. There is no one wiser in the SBC.” That should fully sum up my thoughts on his chapel message and this post.

August 27, 2018 5:13 pm

Olivea

But this comment is illustrative of the problem, is it not? Nobody deserves that kind of hyperbole. The wisest person in the SBC may well be a senior believer who cannot make it to church some place. If you think too highly of a sinner you can never see a man’s sin (wherever it may occur). It is like the revered protection that Catholic priests enjoyed until recently. Even a small amount of Biblical reflection would show that the likes of Peter and Paul accepted their own flaws and conducted themselves with due humbleness. It’s all about Jesus, Shelvin.

I’ve taken some time to reply to this message. I was elected as a trustee of NOBTS this past June at the SBC. I will take my first trip to the seminary in mid-September and then attend my first trustee meeting in October. I have never met Dr Kelly personally and am looking forward to that opportunity when I attend the Trustee Orientation next month.
I listened to the portion of the message where Dr Kelly shared from his journal. I appreciate Jay’s thoughtful response and the fact that he took the time to share his concerns with Dr Kelly. This alone speaks volumes about Dr Kelly and Jay’s character.
I too have the Baptist Blues. I did not attend the SBC this past year – nor I have attended regularly. I realize it is my choice. My limited travel budget from the church means I can attend wither the SBC or the annual meeting of the Northwest Baptist Convention and most years I have chose to attend the NWBC instead of the SBC. But the blues remain-
Like Dr Kelly, grieve over the decline in baptisms, over the way several notable leaders in our SBC have left their positions, and the continuing – unnecessary in my opinion – controversy over Calvinism and Traditional Baptist understandings. Like some he met during his travels I too wonder what has happened to the SBC? I realize some of that is nostalgia – and some sadness that my age means that some of the future choices and innovations will be made in the SBC will be made without my input (which probably isn’t all that insightful anyway).
While I don’t agree with all of Dr Kelly’s assessments I do appreciate the courage it took for Jay to post this response and I look forward to learning all I can about NOBTS and assisting in whatever ways I can in reversing the Baptist Blues that some are experiencing. I do believe our best days are ahead of us and not behind us.

Thank you for this response. I appreciate your words and your willingness to serve this school that I love. I live just across the river in the New Orleans area and I look forward to hopefully meeting you one day soon. If you ever would like a drive around town for a tour, some history, sightseeing or a taste of the great cuisine of NOLA, please allow me the privilege of hosting you. I believe you will have a wonderful time serving the Convention and NOBTS. There are very good people serving there and I have no doubt you will be made to feel very welcome, starting with Dr. Kelley.. May God bless your time of service.

“If people are unaware of the simmering divisions in our convention, we’re never going to be able to fix them,” [Chuck] Kelley, New Orleans Seminary’s president, said in an interview. “The reality is they are there. I think not talking” through “our feelings about the convention has made some of the divisions deeper.”http://www.bpnews.net/51511/kelley-baptist-blues-sermon-sought-unity-not-attack